"We
ask all of you, all over the country, to respond to the call for opinions ...
It does not have to be long but it should testify to the facts of your life situations
and to why access to marriage is important for you and for our community."Michael Hendricks, Quebec marriage case, Sept. 12, 2002

Rene Leboeuf and Michael Hendricks (right) came to Toronto
in June 2002 to march with us in solidarity for equal marriage.

Appeal
in Quebec: the story of our livesHearing scheduled
for September 25-26, 2003

Justice Minister
Martin Cauchon said the issue of gay and lesbian marriages should not be solely
left in the hands of the courts. He said the government had to show "leadership"
on the issue. Canadian Press, September 9, 2002

The
federal government announced September 9 that it will appeal the Quebec Superior
Court Ruling that called the "one man and one woman" definition of marriage
discriminatory [the appeal will be heard September 25-26, 2003]. Ottawa has been
criticized coast to coast by the media and opinion-makers
for the way in which it has avoided addressing the issue of human rights for gay
and lesbian families. The Liberal government's communication on the issue of same-sex
marriage has been dodgy at best. The party has done all it could to avoid the
issue, only extending benefits to gays and lesbians when the courts forced them
too.

So
it is particularly strange to read that the government is going to show leadership
at last. How? By dropping their defenseless and mean case? No. The stacks of documented
evidence, arguments, and judgements produced already is not enough. Ottawa demonstrates
leadership by forming a parliamentary committee
to consider the government's binary choice: open marriage to same-sex couples
or wait until the Supreme Court of Canada demands the change. There is no third
choice, as the Quebec judgement confirmed.

"What
makes the Quebec victory important for all of Canada is that (Judge Lemelin) had
the chance to look at a civil-union law and to comment herself as to whether that
would be enough of a solution for gay and lesbian couples," the lawyer representing
Michael Hendricks and Rene Leboeuf told the Montreal Gazzette. "But Judge Lemelin
said in very strong terms that a civil union, as wonderful as it is because of
all the economic rights that it gives, is still not marriage."

"We ask all of you," Micheal Hendricks wrote in an email (Sept. 12,
2002), "all over the country, to respond to the call for opinions ... It
does not have to be long but it should testify to the facts of your life situations
and to why access to marriage is important for you and for our community. For
example, a nurse in Quebec (Nathalie Ricard) wrote one about herself, her spouse
and their kids. She explained that not being able to marry meant that gay and
lesbian couples and their kids are isolated from the main stream of Canadian life,
that we are infantilized by this discrimination. It was so simple, honest and
truthful that a key part of it ended up being quoted in the judge's decision.
We think that we can use Minister Cauchon's initiative to tell our stories, as
a sort of tribune for the simple truth of our lives."